2. JEFF SIMPSON
Jeff Simpson is a principal in Deloitte Consulting LLP’s Retail practice. He focuses on serving clients across
the marketing, customer, and analytics domains. Based in the Charlotte office, he has served in senior lead-
ership roles at several retailers and agencies and has market eminence as a thought leader in analytics,
digital, marketing strategy, and loyalty.
LOKESH OHRI
Lokesh Ohri is a senior manager and leads Deloitte’s customer engagement, content, and commerce offer-
ings in the firm’s Retail Consulting practice. Ohri advises companies on a wide range of topics, including
omnichannel retail, digital, and supply chain. His clients include large, global public and private organiza-
tions. He has significant experience developing and executing innovative customer engagement and growth
strategies.
KASEY LOBAUGH
Kasey Lobaugh serves as the chief retail innovation officer and omnichannel retail practice leader for
Deloitte Consulting LLP. He works with many retailers to drive strategic perspectives and organizational
change. Lobaugh consults with clients to think about the implications of the changing competitive landscape
and the rapidly evolving consumer. He focuses on broad business-based strategy that will enable innovative
customer experiences, facilitate operational scalability, and provide return on investment.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS
Deloitte is a leading presence in the retail and distribution industry, providing audit, consulting,
risk management, financial advisory, and tax services to more than 75 percent of the Fortune 500
retailers. With more than 2,400 professionals, Deloitte’s Retail and Distribution practice provides
insights, services, and approaches designed to assist retailers across all major subsectors includ-
ing apparel, grocery, food and drug, wholesale and distribution, and online. For more information,
please visit www.deloitte.com/us/retail-distribution or follow us @DeloitteCB.
The new digital divide
3. CONTENTS
Foreword | 2
Digital influence and retail volatility | 4
Under the microscope | 8
The path forward
Conclusion | 14
Appendix | 15
Methodology
The future of digital influence in retail
4. Foreword
W
HEN we started writing the New digital
divide and talking about digital influence,
many challenged (and some laughed at)
our belief that digital was changing the in-store
shopping experience in ways that were not fully
understood. But surprisingly quickly, those chal-
lenges were drowned out by a chorus of believers,
and today there is almost universal recognition
among retailers that digital has reshaped customer
behavior and shopping forever. In fact, a quick lis-
ten to any earnings call will validate that retailers’
investments mirror that recognition and commit-
ment to change.
So then why are so many traditional brick-
and-mortar retailers still so far behind at
creating the digital experiences that custom-
ers really want?
Simply put, it is because these retailers have focused
excessively outward—looking primarily at their e-
commerce competitors—while building their digital
businesses, in an attempt to anticipate customers’
needs and preferences, at the expense of paying
closer attention to the cues their customers were
giving them about what they really want. Add to this
a multitude of distractions around hot topics such
as big data, beacons, and virtual reality, and it is no
surprise that many retailers over the last few
years have sought to read the future through
a telescope—putting an unhealthy focus on
competitors—at the expense of listening to
their own customers. This has only led to the
digital divide getting wider.
The primary goal of this work has always been to
help retailers refocus and close this gap. To that end,
in this edition of the New digital divide, in addition
to drawing on our research and client work, we’ve in-
cluded a series of customer insights made possible by
the Deloitte Retail Volatility Index, our proprietary
measure of the forces driving shifts in market share
across retailers.
This, the 2016 version of Deloitte’s New digital divide report, deepens our explo-
ration of the growing gap between the digital experiences that brick-and-mor-
tar retailers are delivering and the experiences that their customers actually
want. It continues the work we have been doing since 2012 to track the impact
of digital on consumers’ behavior and their shopping habits.
The new digital divide
2
5. All of our work suggests that many of the digital
answers retailers have been seeking externally may,
viewed properly, live within the walls of their own
stores. Indeed, perhaps the most important thing
we’ve learned over the last year is that the most ac-
curate picture of the digital future at any retailer will
perhaps be best viewed through a microscope, not
a telescope—by looking carefully at what is close
at hand to inform better decisions around influ-
encing customer behavior rather than focusing on
competitors.
Jeff, Lokesh, and Kasey
The future of digital influence in retail
3
6. Digital influence and
retail volatility
I
N 2016, digital influence continued its rapid
growth, albeit at a slower rate than we’ve histori-
cally seen (figure 1). Today, $0.56 of every dollar
spent in a store is influenced by a digital interaction.
And when we include the primary source of growth
in retail—online sales—the impact of digital influ-
ence is even greater (figure 2).
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Deloitte 2016 digital influence survey.
Note: Dates reflect years that studies are published. Sales totals represent portion of previous years’ retail sales based
on US Census data; for example, 2016 sales portion reflects 2015 retail sales figure.
2013 2014 2015 2016
14%
$0.3T
$1.1T
$1.8T
$2.1T
36%
49%
56%
Digital
Influence factor: The percentage of in-store retail sales
influenced by the shopper’s use of any digital device,
including: desktop computers, laptops, netbooks, tablets,
smartphones, wearable devices, and in-store devices (for
instance, kiosk or mobile payment device). It is an
accelerating phenomenon that is both shaping how
consumers shop and make decisions in-store and setting
new, higher expectations for retailers’ digital offerings
157% growth 36% growth 14% growth
2013 2014 2015 2016
5%
$0.2T
$0.6T
$1.0T
$1.4T
19%
28%
37%
Mobile
Influence factor: The percentage of in-store retail sales
influenced by the shopper’s use of a web-enabled mobile
device, including smartphones
280% growth 47% growth 32% growth
After sharp increases year over year in 2014 and 2015, the digital influence factor is cooling off, growing only 14 percent
last year after sustaining multiple years of greater than 30 percent growth. Mobile influence factor tapered in 2016 as
well, but it continues to be less mature than digital overall.
Figure 1. Digital influence continues to grow, although at a slowing pace
The new digital divide
4
7. But even as digital influence has risen, retailers’ abil-
ity to influence the purchase journey has decreased.
Why? Because the large e-commerce players, as well
as digital platforms such as Pinterest, are operating
at such scale now that they are shaping customers’
definitions of what a great customer experience is.
Not only that, but they are also simply more con-
nected (often in real time) to the customer’s needs
than the typical brick-and-mortar retailer.
How did this happen? Think for a second about the
fallacy that any single retailer, which only interacts
with a customer six to eight times per year (in a
mostly transactional manner), can gather enough
information to provide a meaningfully personalized
experience. Contrast this with the kind of relation-
ship, trust, and understanding of preferences and
purchase intent that a digital platform like Pinterest
can create when they interact with that same cus-
tomer for several hours a day.
As a result, almost universally, customers’ pre-
ferred method of locating, buying, and re-
ceiving products in-store has been redefined
by their online experiences.
In addition, customers today can go to their Inter-
net browser, have it search the broad, fragmented
marketplace, and get exactly what they want. No
longer do they have to settle for something that is
close to what they want; the browser curates the
exact assortment they are seeking, far more quickly
and easily than a visit to the mall. This dynamic has
led to a significant increase in the shift of market
share as nimble small and mid-level players col-
lectively steal share from larger, more traditional,
at-scale retailers. This fragmentation and volatility
in the market is reflected in Deloitte’s Retail Volatil-
ity Index (figure 3).1
The competition is no longer
coming from the big box across the street, but rather
from a myriad of newer, smaller competitors, most
perhaps too small to capture the attention of the big
players, but each eating away at market share.
As share shifts, the single biggest challenge many
retailers are facing is the cultural gravity of their
The large e-commerce
players, as well as digital
platforms such as
Pinterest, are operating at
such scale now that they
are shaping customers’
definitions of what a great
customer experience is.
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Considering e-commerce sales (100 percent digitally
influenced) in addition to digitally influenced in-store
sales highlights the significance of digital, which really
influences 60 percent of sales.
Source: Deloitte 2016 digital influence survey.
Notes: Sales totals represent portion of previous years’
retail sales based on US Census data; for example, 2016
sales portion reflects 2015 retail sales figure. Digital
influence sales figures exclude not-applicable categories:
“nonstore retailers” and “gasoline stations” in 2016.
2016
$3.8T
$4.1T
44%
40%
56% 60%
Digitally
influenced sales
In-store and
e-commerce
In-store
Non-digital
Figure 2. Online sales contribute to
the importance of digital
The future of digital influence in retail
5
8. own traditional functional processes, talent prac-
tices, and business models (in functions including
merchandising, marketing, and supply chain). The
pull of these traditional structures is so great that
these retailers, should they remain overly outwardly
focused on their competitors’ practices, are destined
to remain 12–24 months behind in recognizing and
meeting their customers’ changing needs. For ex-
ample, many retailers are still utilizing the same
traditional key performance indicators that have
been used for years rather than evolving how they
define success to keep up with changing customer
desires. Several examples:
• Retailers have been painfully slow at mov-
ing from a legacy “campaign” mind-set (where
everything is planned around sales events) to a
“customer” mind-set (where the planning pro-
cess is built around the needs of different seg-
ments of customers instead of sales events).
• We regularly see historical attribution models
that do not properly recognize customer inter-
actions across channels or ascribe the proper
importance to different interactions along the
customer journey (that is, helping customers
easily select and validate products may just be
the most important customer interaction on the
path to purchase).
• Adding to this confusion, the traditional
approach to measuring cross-device usage fre-
quently overstates key metrics such as audi-
ence size and engagement—introducing even
more “noise” into many of the budgeting and
planning processes.
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Kasey Lobaugh and Jacob Bruun-Jensen, Deloitte Retail Volatility Index: How 100 years of conventional wisdom is
being disrupted, Deloitte, http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/
beyond-trends-retail-volatility-index.html, p. 9.
Note: Based on the top 153 US retailers.
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
0.69
0.70
0.71
0.72
0.73
2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Market share volatility Concentration index
Market share volatility
Measured as the weighted standard deviation;
retailers contributing most to annual volatility
Concentration index
Measured as the relative mean difference or
the “Gini coefficient”
Figure 3. Deloitte retail volatility index
The new digital divide
6
9. • The staffing and talent models in key business
functions such as social media, media planning,
and customer relationship management (CRM)
do not recognize how these business functions
have changed with the advent of the large digi-
tal platforms. Long-standing disciplines such
as buying media have completely changed in
today’s environment and require very differ-
ent skill sets than these functions did even 12
months ago.
Reliance on these traditional approaches leads to
flawed budgeting and decisions. Retailers need to
not only understand these changing needs better
and work toward breaking free of outmoded ways of
operating, but also completely revisit the historical
data they have, build partnerships for data they wish
they had, and find ways to generate data they never
knew they needed.
The takeaway? Don’t try to build everything your-
self! Retailers should embrace the native capabilities
of their digital touchpoints and integrate with plat-
forms where their customers are already interacting
at scale rather than trying to build such platforms
themselves.
Moreover, thriving in disruption requires taking a
new look at one’s own financial structure, organiza-
tional structure, and ecosystems to drive the agility
needed to respond to and anticipate the needs of
today’s digitally connected consumer. Where to
start? Consider resetting legacy planning and bud-
geting functions: Traditional budgeting and return
on investment measures simply have not kept pace
with shifts in customer behavior. For example, few
retailers leverage an integrated budgeting/planning
process that plans holistically across channels. This
oversight often results in two things: double and
triple counting key metrics such as customer inter-
actions and failing to recognize programs that are
decreasing in productivity.
As a result, increasingly, we are seeing senior man-
agement express frustration as multiple business
units claim individual credit for the same result. To
quote a senior executive we spoke with recently, “My
sales are flat, but if I added up all of the incremental
‘wins’ each of my functional leaders is reporting, our
business would have grown by 20 percent.”
The future of digital influence in retail
7
10. Under the microscope
The path forward
E
NCOURAGINGLY, our work illuminates huge
pockets of untapped sources of insight that,
perhaps surprisingly, live within most retailers’
own four walls. A focus on where to look and how to
better understand this information can significantly
accelerate the journey to digital effectiveness, pro-
viding competitive advan-
tage and differentiation.
Our research suggests that
retailers should focus on
two primary areas to deep-
en their understanding: cus-
tomers and categories.
Customers:
The Millennial
mind-set
Each year, our digital divide
research reveals new and
excitingdevelopmentsabout
how customer behaviors
are changing. This year, our work revealed
a rapidly accelerating dynamic in customer behav-
ior that we call the “Millennial mind-set” (figure 4).
In short, we are seeing demographic groups that
have displayed historically lower levels of digital
influence start to embrace some of the newer digital
features and functions available in the market.
That said, there are clear limits as to just how far
consumers will go in using digital services when
making purchase decisions. For example, while
we see older customers adopting the use of mobile
devices to locate products, we do not see them fully
embrace more sophisticated mobile capabilities
such as mobile payment systems. This continuum of
adoption and usage suggests that retailers will need
to manage a delicate balance of introducing newer
functionalities while simultaneously maintaining
an acceptable service level with their less digitally
sophisticated customer base.
Retailers can help themselves in this effort by under-
standing the customer journey and the key elements,
or “moments,” of that journey that contribute to the
overall customer experience
(figure 5). According to our
analysis, each such moment
is potentially subject to digi-
tal influence.
Using these moments in the
customer journey to guide
the analysis, this year’s
research found some com-
pelling consumer behav-
iors at various points in
the journey, as well as sev-
eral changes from last year’s
findings:
• Consumers this year
report that they desire to search for informa-
tion about a specific product or product category
rather than receive information during the find
inspiration moment. They are influenced less
by advertising pushed to them in the face of
what appears to be a rapidly growing trend for
consumers to take their own lead in the shop-
ping journey and pull out what they want (see
figure 6). One implication is that, rather than
pushing information at consumers through
advertising to inspire them in moments defined
by the retailer, retailers should instead iden-
tify the steps in the shopping journey where the
consumer is most likely to be inspired, and then
deliver that inspiration through the consumer’s
preferred channels of engagement.
A focus on where
to look and how to
better understand
this information can
significantly accelerate
the journey to digital
effectiveness.
The new digital divide
8
11. Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Deloitte 2016 digital influence survey.
Figure 4. The spread of the Millennial mind-set
The gap between Millennials and non-Millennials is closing as older generations adopt the Millennial mind-set.
Comparison of Millennials and
non-Millennials in their use of
digital in a shopping trip
Millennials Non-Millennials
Who used digital before the trip?
Who used digital during the trip?
Who used digital after the trip?
10% more non-Millennials
in 2015
1% more non-Millennials
in 2016
17% more Millennials
in 2015
11% more Millennials
in 2016
4% more Millennials
in 2015
4% more Millennials
in 2016
2015 2016
70% 71%
2015 2016
80% 71%
2015 2016
44% 55%
2015 2016
27% 44%
2015 2016
10% 12%
2015 2016
14% 16%
The future of digital influence in retail
9
12. • Over 93 percent of consumers report
using a digital device in the browse and
research moment.
• The purchase and pay moment is critical:
When checking out, shoppers consider a quick
and easy process two times as important as any
other experience.
• The return and service moment appears to
be more influenced this year by digital devices
than in 2015, with 39 percent of shoppers likely
to initiate a product return or refund from a digi-
tal device compared to just 20 percent last year.
Even as our analysis reveals ongoing changes in
consumer preferences and behaviors at various
moments of the shopping journey, we also found
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Deloitte 2016 digital influence survey.
Find inspiration Browse/
research
Select/
validate
Purchase/
pay
Post purchase/
service
Beauty
Automotive
Home
Electronics
Men’s
Women’s
Children’s
Grocery
Health
Digital plays an outsized role at this stage of the shopper's journey
Digital does not play an outsized role at this stage in the shopper’s journey
Digital does not play an outsized role across any step of the shopper’s journey.
However, heavy interaction with the retailer was identified at this stage in the
shopper’s journey.
Figure 5. Moments that matter in the customer shopping journey
The new digital divide
10
13. that a significant number of consumers want to
manage the journey themselves, directing the ways
and times in which they engage retailers rather than
following a path prescribed by retailers or market-
ers. Indeed, 66 percent of this year’s consumers cite
the desire for a self-directed journey, up from 30
percent just two years ago. Providing further evi-
dence of this phenomenon, when it comes to prod-
uct awareness, 76 percent of shoppers state that
they look at a retailer’s website or app to become
aware of a product or category on their own. Fur-
ther, we saw a marked increase in the willingness
to share data, with 48 percent of shoppers and 58
percent of Millennials willing to share data in return
for personalized service.
Additionally, due to the nature of digital and mobile,
the journey has become less linear and more fluid,
with the potential for retailers to use digital services
to create a “wormhole” from one step in the jour-
ney to another. For example, shoppers for women’s
apparel often find the find inspiration step critical.
Let’s assume that a shopper finds inspiration in this
step through social media. Now imagine if the cus-
tomer were able to make a purchase directly from
the inspiration step by buying through social media.
The retailer will have captured the consumer at a
time when his or her interest is piqued and digital
influence is high.
The bottom line is that customers are willing to
engage in meaningful ways—it’s just that most
retailers are not providing meaningful opportuni-
ties for consumers to do so. For example, 3 percent
of shoppers used the “buy online pickup in store”
(BOPUS) option in their last trip but 13 percent
indicated that it is their preferred method of deliv-
ery. Retailers need to leverage digital touchpoints at
key moments that matter for any given category to
propel the consumer toward purchase before they
lose motivation. Whether communicating through
wearables, in-home technology, in-store beacons,
or other methods, a connection with consumers can
be made real-time, in both directions, and beyond
geographical considerations. This connection is
not necessarily governed by time or location, and
should support today’s shopper’s natural inclina-
tion to champion his or her own shopping journey.
The most effective way to capture wandering shop-
pers is to let them engage and buy anywhere along
the journey they choose.
Categories: Understanding
the nuances
In our 2015 report,2
we discovered significant differ-
ences in how digital impacts behaviors across mer-
chandise categories. This year’s research continues
to elaborate on those differences. One anomaly is
readily apparent: While digital influence growth is
slowing overall, it continues to rapidly accelerate in
categories such as grocery and health (figure 7).
To better understand how different customer
behaviors are across categories, consider the exam-
ple of shipping fees. Almost every retailer has imple-
mented free shipping and is stressing their supply
chain in an effort to execute against same- and
next-day deliveries. But does every customer really
require free shipping, and is same/next-day deliv-
ery really a customer imperative across the board?
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Deloitte 2016 digital influence survey.
Only
push
Only
pull
Percent of shoppers
who engage only with
push marketing
or only with pull
marketing
3%
25%
Percent of shoppers
who engage with
push and pull
marketing
Pull
89%
Push
68%
Figure 6. Engagement with marketing:
push versus pull
The future of digital influence in retail
11
14. Our research says no, and, in fact, it appears that
Amazon has redefined the acceptable window for
the receipt of merchandise (figure 8).
At face value, across all categories, only 35 percent
of customers exhibit a willingness to pay for ship-
ping on online orders—hence all of the energy (and
margin erosion) around providing free shipping.
But, when preferences are examined at the category
level, it quickly becomes apparent that almost half
of those shopping in the children's (47 percent)
category are willing to pay for shipping. Given the
highly “giftable” nature of these categories, which
creates an artificial timing, and the fact that par-
ents of young children are arguably among the most
demanding, time-starved shoppers, we believe that
by chasing free shipping universally, brick-and-
mortar retailers are missing a significant opportu-
nity to establish competitive advantage (through
availability) and profitability (margin).
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.comSource: Deloitte Analysis
Figure 7. Digital influence varies by category
Digital influence
Mobile influence
Beauty
Automotive
Home
Electronics
Men’s
Women’s
Children’s
Grocery
Health
59% (+4 vs. 2015)
36% (+7% since 2015)
51%
57%
30%
69% (+7 vs. 2015)
45% (+8 vs. 2015)
38%
46%
34%
52%
54%
37% (+2 vs 2015)
58% (-1 vs. 2015)
35%
38%
56%
34%
Note: Exact year-over-year is available for three categories: Auto, Electronics, and Home. All other categories vary between the
2015 and 2016 studies.
Digital and mobile influence was higher in 2016 than in 2015 for nearly all categories for which
year-over-year data were available. However, influence varies by category.
The new digital divide
12
15. In addition, we are anxiously awaiting the day when
some retailer aggressively challenges the notion
that shipping online purchases is really free. The
last time we checked, most “free shipping” services
required some type of paid membership . . . mean-
ing it really isn’t free!
Graphic: Deloitte University Press | DUPress.com
Source: Deloitte Analysis
Figure 8. Willingness to pay for shipping on online orders
Proportion of shoppers
willing to pay for
delivery at all
35%
Proportion of shoppers who would no longer buy the
product based on the given delivery time
Next day
Same day
One week
Two day
More than
one week
9%
9%
29%
18%
7%
“Prime effect”
The future of digital influence in retail
13
16. D
ESPITE the challenges we’ve outlined, we’ve
never been more optimistic about the oppor-
tunities that exist for traditional brick-and-
mortar retailers to regain their footing in the digi-
tal marketplace. Among the almost infinite list of
options, there exist several common themes for suc-
cessfully navigating the road ahead:
1. Don’t try to build everything yourself.
Retailers should consider engaging in partner-
ships with platforms where their customers are
already interacting at scale versus trying to build
such capabilities on their own. Through these
partnerships, retailers can gain access to the
kind of detailed, real-time data they need to craft
a truly customized customer experience.
2. Revamp your organization’s financial
structure, organizational structure, oper-
ating structure, and ecosystems to support
agility and responsiveness to customers’ needs.
Planning and budgeting functions could be a
good place to start.
3. Embrace category differences and recog-
nize that digital initiatives appeal differentially
across customer segments and merchandise
categories. Every investment, prioritization, and
decision should be evaluated at both the custom-
er and category levels.
4. Wherever possible, use digital to enable cus-
tomers to lead their own journey rather
than making them step through your store
layout or merchandise hierarchy to find and
buy products.
5. As the growth of digital slows, recognize that
market share needs to be pursued more
surgically. Retailers should focus on under-
standing where share gains will come from and
specifically on what experiences they will need
to focus on to be able to win customers.
6. Most importantly, to drive sales growth, retail-
ers should refocus on innovating around
product offerings and the customer expe-
rience. We believe that the primary source
of differentiation and competitive advantage
in today’s environment will be leveraging the
store footprint to help customers find, select,
purchase, and receive products. For example,
brick-and-mortar retailers have an opportunity
to begin to better drive in-store foot traffic to
online sites—through the quintessentially low-
tech mechanism of signage. Anyone who is run-
ning an e-commerce business today knows how
expensive it is to buy online traffic, but for retail-
ers with physical locations, our research shows
that in-store signage is a far more powerful
influence than social media.
Brick-and-mortar retail companies face formidable
competition from e-commerce players; yet tradi-
tional retailers need not give up the battle for growth.
By seeking an in-depth understanding of their own
customers and by using their physical assets to their
advantage, retailers can put in place strategies for
customer engagement that allow them to thrive.
Conclusion
The new digital divide
14
17. Retail volatility index
methodology
Concentration index methodology: The Gini
coefficient is used to indicate how the distribution
of retail market share has changed from 2007–2015
for the top 120–140 retailers in 2015.
Market concentration is a useful index as it indicates
the degree of competition in the market. To measure
market concentration in this study, the Gini coeffi-
cient was used to indicate how the distribution of
retail sales has changed within the top 120–140 re-
tailers from 2007–2015.
A Gini coefficient ranges from 0 (market share is dis-
tributed evenly across all firms) to 1 (one firm has
all sales). It is a function of the number of firms and
their respective shares of the total sales. It is calcu-
lated as the mean of the difference between every
possible pair of data points, divided by the mean of
all the data points.
Deloitte volatility index methodology: The vol-
atility measure is based on year-over-year weighted
standard deviation of market share change.
Standard deviation is often used to measure histori-
cal volatility of price related to a financial instrument
over a given time period. For this study, standard
deviation is applied to measure the historical vola-
tility of market share for the top 120–140 retailers
from 2007–2015.
A higher volatility over time can be interpreted as
increased market share volatility within the top
120–140 retailers. An increase in market shares
being “traded” versus a lower volatility over time
reflects lower market share volatility or less market
share being “traded.”
Digital influence survey
methodology
This survey was commissioned by Deloitte and con-
ducted online by an independent research company
on April 25–May 5, 2016.
The survey polled a national sample of 5,014 ran-
dom consumers. Data were collected and weighted
to be representative of the US Census for gender,
age, income, and ethnicity. A 95 percent confidence
level was used to test for significance.
Below are the margins of error for the specific sam-
ple sets in this study:
• National random sample: 95 percent confidence,
margin of error 1–2 percent (+/-)
• Device owners: 95 percent confidence, margin of
error 1–2 percent (+/-)
• Smartphone owners: 95 percent confidence,
margin of error 1–2 percent (+/-)
Additionally, subsets of randomly assigned respon-
dents were asked to provide information about how
they use a digital device to shop for a product sub-
category (such as cosmetics or perishables). Sample
sizes ranged from 160–164 (95 percent confidence,
margin of error 7–8 percent [+/-]). Specific digital
behavior data represent consumers who use digital
devices to shop.
Appendix
Methodology
The future of digital influence in retail
15
18. ENDNOTES
1. Kasey Lobaugh and Jacob Bruun-Jensen, Deloitte Retail Volatility Index: How 100 years of conventional wisdom is
being disrupted, Deloitte, http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/beyond-trends-
retail-volatility-index.html.
2. Kasey Lobaugh, Jeff Simpson, and Lokesh Ohri, Navigating the new digital divide: Capitalizing on digital influence
in retail, Deloitte, 2015, http://www2.deloitte.com/us/en/pages/consumer-business/articles/navigating-the-new-
digital-divide-retail.html.
The new digital divide
16
19. CONTACTS
Jeff D. Simpson
Principal
Deloitte Consulting LLP
+ 704 247 0890
jesimpson@deloitte.com
Lokesh Ohri
Senior manager
Deloitte Consulting LLP
+1 212 618 4184
lohri@deloitte.com
The authors would like to thank Evan Anderson, Rob Bamford, Matt Blank, Josh Friedberg, David
Kearns, Thom McElroy, Greta O’Brien, Rod Sides, Herb Williams-Dalgart, and Whitney Young for
their insights and invaluable contributions to this research.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The future of digital influence in retail
